National 28th amendment?

[jrmh]

California SJR7 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2023-09-21) Federal constitutional convention: firearms. [Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 175, Statutes of 2023.]

legiscan.com

i know their plan is a hot pile of bs and its far flung. but do you guys think it has the potential to pass if most republicans vote no.


(I'm still shell shocked from measure 114)

Read More

 

[Stomper]

Nope

 

[Cotton]

California SJR7 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2023-09-21) Federal constitutional convention: firearms. [Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 175, Statutes of 2023.]

legiscan.com

i know their plan is a hot pile of bs and its far flung. but do you guys think it has the potential to pass if most republicans vote no.


(I'm still shell shocked from measure 114)

 

[saxon]

when the government wants to gut the 2nd, they are about to do something that you need a gun for......

 

[CamoDeafie]

Gonna need 34 States for that I think, and then 38 States Legislatures to unanimously agree to ratify that.

Edit. With 27 States having some form of Constitutional/Permitless carry laws, and the just about 50/50 split in Senate either way....


Better odds for Term Limits and mandatory retirement ages for Congress to pass

 

[Cavedweller]

CA can call for an Article 5 convention if they want. That doesn't mean they can get 2/3 of the states to to agree to show up.

 

[ma96782]

Wouldn't it be simple/simpler just to???

Go big or go home. Rrrrrright....

Aloha, Mark

 

[Yarome]

I realize this is simply an effort to gain support from his leftist constituents, but I have to wonder.... among those... how many are going to think, "what a moron"... and lose their vote(??)

I mean... if a pro-2A representative in my area tried pushing through a completely wasted effort hair brained idea (with my tax dollars), I would seriously have to consider their suitability to serve in office. Likely, my conclusion would be, "what a dipwad!!"... more interested in wasting time and resources on BS games than addressing real issues with real solutions?? I don't think so, buddy!!

 

[Member 53328]

Nope.

 

[NeoBlackdog]

One of these days they're gonna light the fuse on a firecracker that's gonna go off in their hand and take their fingers off.

 

[Koda]

so if I read that right they want to pass a constitutional amendment to prohibit arms but not remove the 2nd amendment which says the right to arms "shall not be infringed"?

 

[CamoDeafie]

so if I read that right they want to pass a constitutional amendment to prohibit arms but not remove the 2nd amendment which says the right to arms "shall not be infringed"?

Pretty much, yeah

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

Taking a wrecking ball to the US Constitution to increase the Overton window. Got it.

 

[Member 53328]

so if I read that right they want to pass a constitutional amendment to prohibit arms but not remove the 2nd amendment which says the right to arms "shall not be infringed"?

Brought to you by liberals…..

If it doesn't make sense…. It makes sense.

 

[Koda]

Brought to you by liberals…..

If it doesn't make sense…. It makes sense.

nobodys trying to take away your guns....
"but".......

 

[nammac]

I didn't get any further than this:

WHEREAS, Modern technology and capabilities, including semiautomatic firing mechanisms, capacity, range, accuracy, and use of specialized ammunition, of the firearms commercially available today make them far more lethal than anything the founders could have imagined in the 18th century, when most weapons needed to be reloaded after every shot; and ….

This right here disqualifies it from serious consideration, as the SCOTUS has already said that the Second Amendment is applicable to modern arms and not limited to those of the 18th century.

If that's the case than no more electronic communications, everything must be done by quill and parchment…

 

[Yarome]

nobodys trying to take away your guns....
"but".......

They don't even try to sugar coat it any more. They're flat out saying... "we're going after all the guns". Total disarmament. "There is no place in civilized society for firearms". "There is no reasonable need for anyone to own a gun". Etc, etc....

 

[fmvolume86]

California SJR7 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2023-09-21) Federal constitutional convention: firearms. [Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 175, Statutes of 2023.]

legiscan.com

i know their plan is a hot pile of bs and its far flung. but do you guys think it has the potential to pass if most republicans vote no.


(I'm still shell shocked from measure 114)

I wouldn't underestimate Dictator Newsom

 

[pdx210]

California SJR7 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2023-09-21) Federal constitutional convention: firearms. [Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 175, Statutes of 2023.]

legiscan.com

i know their plan is a hot pile of bs and its far flung. but do you guys think it has the potential to pass if most republicans vote no.


(I'm still shell shocked from measure 114)

You mean the same California that Passed Proposition 57, intended to draw down the state's prison population. It allowed inmates convicted of violent and nonviolent crimes to earn credits through rehabilitative programs and leave custody more quickly

The same California that doesn't prosecute petty theft, drug possession

The same California that end cash bail if a defendant can't afford to pay.

The same California that's now closing seven prisons because its not putting criminals in jail.

The same California's violent crime rate increased by 6.0%, aggravated assaults jumped by 8.9%, and homicides +7.7% and rape increased 7.9%, in just one year 2020 to 2021

• In 2021, aggravated assaults were 67% of reported violent crimes; 24% were robberies, 8% were rape, and 1% were homicides.
• California's violent crime rate in 2020 was higher than the national rate.

LOl, they are worried about guns but not crime, violence and homicide

 

[Mark W.]

I didn't get any further than this:

WHEREAS, Modern technology and capabilities, including semiautomatic firing mechanisms, capacity, range, accuracy, and use of specialized ammunition, of the firearms commercially available today make them far more lethal than anything the founders could have imagined in the 18th century, when most weapons needed to be reloaded after every shot; and ….

This right here disqualifies it from serious consideration, as the SCOTUS has already said that the Second Amendment is applicable to modern arms and not limited to those of the 18th century.

If that's the case than no more electronic communications, everything must be done by quill and parchment…

Cause you hardly get hurt as a 3/4' diameter lead ball blows a hole in you a golf ball would fit into. Oh I thought you were talking about those 18th century smoke poles.